Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Sleep-Disordered Breathing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the link between gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and sleep-disordered breathing using complete polysomnography and questionnaires in a case-control study of pregnant women. METHODS: Pregnant women (body mass index [BMI] less than 35, no prior diabetes or hypertension) were eligible as cases (n=26) if diagnosed with GDM by routine 75-g oral glucose tolerance test. Women in the control group without GDM (n=26) were matched for gestational age at polysomnography, BMI, and age. Polysomnography were conducted at home at 24-32 weeks of gestation. Sleepiness score (Epworth Sleepiness Scale), subjective sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), risk for depression (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale), and restless legs syndrome were assessed by questionnaire. RESULTS: Primary outcome apnea-hypopnea index (4.2±3.9 events per hour in women in the case group compared with 3.8±2.3 events per hour in women in the control group) as well as other objective and subjective sleep measures, including oxygen desaturation index, snoring, and flow limitation, were not significantly different between groups. Sleepiness was greater in women in the case group than in women in the control group (9.8±3.6 compared with 7.2±3.6, P=.05). Additionally, 23% of women in the case group compared with 0% of women in the control group (P<.01) reported an Edinburgh Scale score of at least 10 (suggesting significant depression) and 46% of women with GDM reported restless legs syndrome compared to 19% of women in the control group (P=.07). CONCLUSION: There was no association between GDM and sleep-disordered breathing in pregnant women with prepregnancy BMIs under 35 and no medical comorbidities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".